Your definition is good, and I like it, but it's probably too vague to really get you anywhere. The thing this article is right about is that exactly same prog

Your definition is good, and I like it, but it's probably too vague to really get you anywhere. The thing this article is right about is that exactly same program with shorter keywords isn't likely anyone's definition of a more powerful language. What pg is right about is that writing less code to achieve more is a workable definition of power - as long as the savings come in better program structure and not in cosmetic changes. Which category Arc falls in, I'm not able to comment on yet.